In re the Arbitration between Schwartz & American Swim Pools

74 A.D.2d 638, 425 N.Y.S.2d 41, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10316
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 25, 1980
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 74 A.D.2d 638 (In re the Arbitration between Schwartz & American Swim Pools) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re the Arbitration between Schwartz & American Swim Pools, 74 A.D.2d 638, 425 N.Y.S.2d 41, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10316 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Opinion

In a proceeding to stay arbitration, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 17, 1979, which denied the application. Judgment reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, and application to stay arbitration granted. Cases involving public policy considerations which are "embodied in statute or decisional law” and which "prohibit, in an absolute sense,” the granting of the relief sought, should not proceed to arbitration for the resolution of the issues (Matter of Sprinzen [Nomberg], 46 NY2d 623, 631). Section 21-11.2 of the Nassau County Administrative Code bars home improvement contractors from operating without a license. The purpose of the requirement is to protect the public (Nassau County Administrative Code, § 21-11.0). Public [639]*639policy considerations forbid enforcement of a contract in violation of the code or even the granting of quantum meruit relief (Segrete v Zimmerman, 67 AD2d 999; Buffoleno v Denning, 82 Misc 2d 472). Here, an unlicensed contractor is seeking enforcement of a home improvement contract in arbitration. Under such circumstances, the application for a stay of arbitration should have been granted. Rabin, J. P., Cohalan, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Metrobuild Associates, Inc. v. Nahoum
51 A.D.3d 555 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Al-Sullami v. Broskie
40 A.D.3d 1021 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Cudahy v. Cohen
171 Misc. 2d 469 (Nassau County District Court, 1997)
In re the Arbitration between Heller
178 A.D.2d 195 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Arbitration between Wertlieb & Greystone Partnerships Group, Inc.
165 A.D.2d 644 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
Millington v. Rapoport
98 A.D.2d 765 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Dartmouth Plan, Inc. v. Valle
117 Misc. 2d 534 (New York Supreme Court, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 A.D.2d 638, 425 N.Y.S.2d 41, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10316, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-schwartz-american-swim-pools-nyappdiv-1980.